Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id CAA04727 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Fri, 18 Aug 2000 02:23:03 +0100 Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 11:20:29 +1000 From: John Wilkins <wilkins@wehi.EDU.AU> Subject: RE: Changing threads/ American Nationalism !? To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk In-Reply-To: <A4400389479FD3118C9400508B0FF230040EF3@DELTA> Message-ID: <MailDrop1.2d7j-PPC.1000818112029@mac463.wehi.edu.au> X-Authenticated: <wilkins@wehiz.wehi.edu.au> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
On Thu, 17 Aug 2000 09:11:31 +0200 D.Gatherer@organon.nhe.akzonobel.nl
(Gatherer, D. (Derek)) wrote:
.....
>Kenneth:
>I now exactly where the benefits of Darwinism are, but how will you
>ever
>convince American scientist of the same fact, if Lamarckism is one of
>the
>cornerstones of their scientific thought !?
>
>Derek:
>But is it? I mean can you name a modern neo-Lamarckian working in the
>USA?
>I can't. The only neo-Lamarckian I can think of is Robert Steele, and
>he's
>an Aussie. (I could mention Brian Goodwin, or Mae-Wan Ho, but they
>might
>not thank me for the label neo-Lamarckian, and in any case they're both
>based in the UK, and Goodwin is English).
That's *Ted* Steele, and he's a Pom who now works in Australia :-)
However, his collaborators are Australian.
It's entirely a matter of labels whether Steele is a neo-Lamarckian. It
really depends on how you draw the lines.
Assume for a moment that his hypothesis is correct (which immunologists
who work in the field do not think it is): variants of
antibody-producing genes that have mutated in the body of one organism
through what is called clonal selection are supposed to be transferred
from the T cells to the gametes of that organism. They are then passed
on to the progeny of that organism. Steele thinks this is a clear case
of the inheritance of acquired characters, and hence is neo-Lamarckian.
However, the *generation* of these antibody genes is - surprise - random
variation and selective retention. That's why it's called clonal
*selection* theory; and Burnet and Medawar deliberately drew the analogy
from Darwinian evolution. So is this a neo-Lamarckian process? Only if
you take the Weismann Barrier to be an inherent part of Darwinian
evolution. Most current biologists who work in the field would not, I
think, call this neo-Lamarckian.
Then there's epigenetic inheritance. this is the view that heredity can
be non-genetic. This is clearly not neo-Lamarckian. There's no
"retranscribing" of somatic information into heredity facctors; what is
passed on *is* soma (or at best cytological or extragenetic). See
Jablonka and Lamb's book on this - the result is still Darwinian.
Jablonka, Eva, and Marion J. Lamb. 1995. Epigenetic inheritance and
evolution: the Lamarckian dimension. Oxford; New York: Oxford University
Press.
also
Jablonka, E., and M. J. Lamb. 1998. Bridges Between Development and
Evolution. Biology and Philosophy 13 (1):119124.
Goodwin and Ho, et al. are "structuralists" who think that one of the
biases on the pathways of evolution is the form or structure that is
possible to develop. Hence, some forms will develop in phylogeny simply
because they are "doable" or likely to appear as the result of their
formal properties. Schlichting and Pigliucci demolish this pretty much,
IMO, and argue that all forms that are possible are possible (duh); why
some appear rather than others is, in the end, the result of viability
(ie, selection) and drift.
Schlichting, Carl D., and Massimo Pigliucci. 1998. Phenotypic Evolution:
A Reaction Norm Perspective. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.
Some URLs:
Steele's home site
http://www.uow.edu.au/science/biol/tsteele.html
His book site
http://www.2think.org/lamarck.shtml
An essay on the generation of information in the immune system:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/fitness.html
--John Wilkins, Head, Graphic Production The Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research Melbourne, Australia <mailto:wilkins@WEHI.EDU.AU> <http://www.users.bigpond.com/thewilkins/darwiniana.html> Homo homini aut deus aut lupus - Erasmus of Rotterdam
===============================This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing) see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Aug 18 2000 - 02:23:56 BST